Random vs. structure-based testing of answer-set programs: an experimental comparison

Authors:
Tomi Janhunen;Ilkka Niemelä;Johannes Oetsch;Jörg Pührer;Hans Tompits
Affiliations:
Aalto University, Department of Information and Computer Science, Aalto, Finland;Aalto University, Department of Information and Computer Science, Aalto, Finland;Technische Universität Wien, Institut für Informationssysteme, Vienna, Austria;Technische Universität Wien, Institut für Informationssysteme, Vienna, Austria;Technische Universität Wien, Institut für Informationssysteme, Vienna, Austria
Venue:
LPNMR'11 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning
Year:
2011

Citing 5
Cited 2

Hints on Test Data Selection: Help for the Practicing Programmer

Computer
On the Input Language of ASP Grounder Gringo

LPNMR '09 Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
The Second Answer Set Programming Competition

LPNMR '09 Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
GrinGo: a new grounder for answer set programming

LPNMR'07 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning
On Testing Answer-Set Programs

Proceedings of the 2010 conference on ECAI 2010: 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Systematic scenario test case generation for nuclear safety systems

Information and Software Technology
Annotating answer-set programs in lana*

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Answer-set programming (ASP) is an established paradigm for declarative problem solving, yet comparably little work on testing of answer-set programs has been done so far. In a recent paper, foundations for structure-based testing of answer-set programs building on a number of coverage notions have been proposed. In this paper, we develop a framework for testing answer-set programs based on this work and study how good the structure-based approach to test input generation is compared to random test input generation. The results indicate that random testing is quite ineffective for some benchmarks, while structurebased techniques catch faults with a high ratemore consistently also in these cases.